Wind Tunnel Politics
12th May 10
Post by Jim Carroll, Chairman, BBH London
Clegg, Cameron and Brown (image courtesy of Campaign magazine)
It was going to be the most important Election in a generation.
It was going to break the mould of British Politics.
It should have been so exciting.
So why did it all seem so unfulfilling? Why did our eager anticipation of the first debate turn to a stifled yawn by the third? Why did our ardour for the new kid turn so quickly to complacency? Why did we shrug at the glossy manifestos, put the recycled thinking straight into the recycling bins?
This was the Sunblest Election. The Election when all the mighty forces of Marketing created three soft, medium sliced, plastic packaged loaves. Designed to please, guaranteed not to let you down. Perfectly pleasant on their own terms, but curiously unsatisfactory.
You see, all three candidates and campaigns had been put through the same Marketing Wind Tunnel.
Rolling focus groups, private polling, polished PR, whispering spin doctors, joy stick analysis…They had collectively eradicated the edges, the uncomfortable, the unpalatable.
They had created three glossy, smooth undifferentiated paradigms of inoffensiveness.
Everyone knows that the debt needs tackling, that there are hard decisions to be made, jobs to be cut, taxes to be raised. But the focus groups said the electorate didn’t want to hear it and so the candidates didn’t want to tackle it. Efficiencies, my arse… No surprise perhaps, that an exclusive consideration of undecided voters produced indecisive outcomes; that researching marginal constituencies produced mainstream opinions; that endless focus groups produced unfocused group-think. It all seemed so timid, so spineless, so lacking in confidence.
It pains me as someone who works in the communications industry to see the techniques designed to sell soap powder applied so assiduously to such substantive matters. It pains me not just because politics ought to be a little more complicated. But also because the Marketing model that’s been applied is itself broken.
Advertising Agencies used to be in the business of finding and articulating difference. We used to help our Clients establish strong, compelling, differentiated truths. Don’t just ‘hold a mirror up to the consumer’, we said. Consumers don’t want their worldview mirrored and reinforced; they want to be challenged, stimulated, inspired. But over the last ten years Marketing has fallen victim to formularisation and commoditisation. ’Best demonstrated practice’ has been distilled, codified, taught and tested. The researchers have taken over the asylum. The quest for difference has been replaced by the quest for inoffensiveness. Holding a mirror up to the consumer is no longer anathema; it is the recognised norm, standard practice. Have you ever wondered why the beer and car ads you used to love now look so similar, so sane, so sensible? Well the Agencies and Marketeers that produce them have been looking for the same answers, in the same way, in the same places.
They’ve all been through the Marketing Wind Tunnel.
This was also supposed to be the first Digital Election. We had visions of grass roots participation, of new voter engagement, of a more visceral, real time debate. Indeed there was a vibrant online conversation, but it was a conversation fuelled by the big beast of telly. I guess the political establishment fell for McLuhan’s seductive aphorism: the medium is the message. They imagined that arming our MPs with Twitter accounts might send the youth of Britain into a swoon. But the truth is the medium is not the message. It communicates and amplifies the message; in some cases it prompts participation with the message. But it is not the message. If you have something to say to young people then the media to talk to them about it are social and digital. But if your message is bland, cautious and commonplace, what do you expect?
It’s obvious that Obama wasn’t successful simply because he designed a cunning digital strategy. It’s obvious that Obama hadn’t been through any Marketing Wind Tunnel. In our world we’d say he was a great product, a great brand, with a real difference, with something worth saying…
I hope, perhaps somewhat optimistically, that all Politicians, winners and losers, are humbled by this Election. I hope there is a rebellion against the insipid, spineless, formularised Wind Tunnel Politics that have deprived us of the vital engagement the electorate craves and the issues demand. They may not want to talk to the likes of us again. But if our political masters want some communication advice for next time, let’s give it to them. Get yourself a great product, with a strong sense of difference. Be confident in who you are and what you stand for. And then sing it from the rooftops (and the blogs and the Twitter feeds). You know what. People may not mind that you’re saying something different or challenging or hard to stomach. They’ll respect you for it. They may well want to talk to you about it.
And if you say it well and persuasively, they might even vote for you.
I’ve always liked this quote by Anita Roddick- “Running a company on market research is like driving while looking in the rear view mirror.
Great post – media culture in Britain eats itself and gets what it deserves. A plate of bland, idealess nothing for your mains. And a non-result for afters.
Or you could be David Cameron and say “a historic and seismic shift” in British politics…
This is a bold and truthful evaluation on the state of many clients and agencies. Analytics are of course very useful, but they should not be the force that runs brands or communications.
Maybe it’s not about the research, it’s how it’s used and managed. It might be worth taking a closer look at the Obama campaign because they spent $millions on research with polling, focus groups etc and still won.
Perhaps we (agencies) should be asking ourselves how do change agents use research to allow brilliant ideas to live and stay alive?
It’s very easy to jump on the bandwagon that assumes research kills all in its path.
Hi Ed,
Yes,I don’t want to jump the anti-research bandwagon.I used to be a researcher myself and I know it’s an industry packed with smart,passionate,insightful people.My contention is that if everyone asks the same questions of the same target groups within the same process,we shouldn’t be surprised that they all come up with the same answers.
Actually 20 years ago I did political focus groups amongst floating voters in marginal constituencies. I feel I could have written the 2010 manifestos then…
Ed, I completely agree, I don’t know how many times I have recommended more leftfield or outre routes to clients or ad agencies because of what I’ve heard in research, only for the more adventurous ideas to be binned because clients and, sometimes, agencies are too conservative. Blame conservative clients, not the research process.
It’s not (only) about what questions you ask, it’s about what you do with the answers.
If you take them literally and run with them, you’re going to be uninteresting and uninspiring, whether you’re selling soap, or the future of the nation.
Jim, great post! I also think there’s a real correlation between the Sunblest nature of politics (and it’s as true here in the States as it is back in Blighty) and the lackluster state of big business right now. Very few companies really have anything to say. They’re scared of the consumer. They’re scared of the government. They’re scared to change.
Ask a company CEO “What do you stand for”? If he’s off the record he’ll answer “Making money”. If he’s on the record he’ll come up with some blather about sustainability or saving the planet. Very few leaders – Jobs, Chambers, Ellison come to mind – truly have the courage of their convictions anymore and place innovation as the core of everything they do.
As for Obama, sadly he seemed to drop any pretense of actually giving a damn what real people thought the day he set foot in the WH and reverted to teleprompter/talking points/special interests type. That’s one reason the Tea Party rebellion has proved so successful and durable.
Im a little slow on this one
But a friend of mine tried to drag me into a political debate for months leading up to abnd during. I kept avoiding it. Then a wrote a 2 page email on why I hate politics
Youve hit almost every point I was trying to make. All it is, is BAD marketing practise to gain swing votes that dont lead to strong policy development or even a party that truly stands for something.
thanks
I couldn’t agree more with your post, which I thought was excellent. The problem for any brands is that they seem these days to try first not to offend rather than actually inspire.
I have long been against massive focus group testing as it’s the surest way to deliver mediocre work. If you look at some of the great work from your own and other London agency histories, ‘I’d like to have one to one with’, ‘Vorsprung Durch Technik’, Silk Cut, B&H Gold and many other great ads apparently failed in focus groups, but were saved by brave clients and brilliant creatives. All produced stunning results for those same brave clients despite the rejection of the focus groups.
Perhaps if any of the parties stood for something, they would stand apart and we wouldn’t be faced with this middle of the road party(s) who are governing us with opinion polls rather than their truly held personal beliefs.